THE Attorney-General’s Chambers is seeking to amend charges against former prime minister Najib Razak over the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) scandal, the Kuala Lumpur High Court heard today. 

Deputy public prosecutor Kamal Baharin applied to change the amounts for two money laundering charges and one power abuse charge, the New Straits Times reported.

The prosecution sought to reduce the amount in the power abuse case from RM49.93 million to RM44.57 million.

As for the money laundering charges, the prosecution applied to amend the amount in the 10th and 12th charges, reducing them from RM652.6 million to RM515.67 million and from RM12.44 million to RM11.41 million, respectively.

The application was made under article 145 of the Federal Constitution, read together with section 376 of the criminal procedural code.

Najib’s counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, however objected to the application.

Najib, 70, faces four charges of using his position to obtain bribes amounting to RM2.3 billion belonging to 1MDB and 21 charges of money laundering involving the same amount. 

Kamal said the power abuse charge was related to the purchase of the Aabar options by 1MDB.

He said these options were given to Aabar in 2012 allegedly as part consideration for International Petroleum Investment Company’s guarantee for the notes that raised US$3.5 billion (RM16.72 billion).

“In May and August 2014, 1MDB through its subsidiary 1MDB Energy Holdings Ltd obtained two loans totalling US$1.23 billion from Deutsche Bank AG.

“From these two loans, Najib received a sum of RM49.93 million between June 23 and December 19, 2014.

On October 9, witness Adam Ariff Mohd Roslan, an analyst from Bank Negara Malaysia, testified that out of the RM45.84 million credited into Najib’s account, RM5.36 million came from an unknown source, which cannot be confirmed due to limitation of documents.

The prosecution sought to amend the charge to make it absolutely clear the amounts credited into the accused’s AmIslamic bank constitutes the offence in question.

Kamal said the discretion of the public prosecutor to amend charges was unrestrained and it could be exercised at any time during the trial.

“The amendment will in no way cause any prejudice or disadvantage the accused as the accused will be given every opportunity to mount his defence.

“The amendment to the charge does not have the effect of changing the nature of the offence or having the effect of opening up a new trial,” he said.

Shafee, however, said the defence needed more time to examine the prosecution’s application.

“We will prepare our submissions and argue in court tomorrow,” he said. – October 24, 2023.